Partly allowed

Altaf and 3 Others v. State of Up and Another

Allahabad HC15 Jul 2024ABAIL/4401/2024

Case brief

AI extract

What is this about?

The court disposed of an anticipatory bail application in a criminal case involving cheating and forgery. The application was partly allowed and partly rejected; bail was granted to two applicants while rejected for two others due to criminal history.

What did the court decide?

Anticipatory bail allowed for applicants 3 and 4 with conditions; rejected for applicants 1 and 2.

Altaf and 3 Others vs State of Up and Another — Anticipatory Bail | Allahabad HC (2024)

¶1

Neutral Citation No. - 2024:AHC:119970

¶2

Court No. - 67

¶3

Case :- CRIMINAL MISC ANTICIPATORY BAIL APPLICATION U/S 438 CR.P.C. No. - 4401 of 2024

¶4

Applicant :- Altaf And 3 Others Opposite Party :- State of U.P. and Another Counsel for Applicant :- Ansar Ahmad,Sandhya Chaturvedi Counsel for Opposite Party :- G.A.

¶5

Hon'ble Deepak Verma,J.

¶6

Heard learned counsel for the applicants and perused the record.

¶7

The instant anticipatory bail application has been filed on behalf of the applicants with a prayer to release them on bail in Case Crime No.106 of 2023, under Sections 420, 467, 468, 471, 120B I.P.C., Police Station- Baghpat District- Baghpat, till conclusion of trial.

¶8

Learned counsel for the applicants submitted that the applicants are innocent and have been falsely implicated in the present case due to ulterior motive. Applicants have not misused the anticipatory bail granted to them and co-operated in the investigation proceedings. Learned counsel for the applicants next submitted that co-accused Chand has been granted anticipatory bail by this Court vide order dated 29.05.2024. Applicants' case is similar with co-accused. It has been submitted that in case applicants are granted anticipatory bail, they shall not misuse the liberty of bail and would obey all conditions of bail.

¶9

On the other hand, learned AGA has vehemently opposed the prayer for grant of anticipatory bail but unable to dispute the submissions raised by the learned counsel for the applicants.

¶10

Considering the arguments advanced by the learned counsel for the parties. The court is of the view that prayer made by applicant no.1 (Altaf) & applicant no.2 (Waseem) for anticipatory bail has been rejected on account of having criminal history.

¶11

So far as applicant no.3 (Islam) & applicant no.4 (Tahira) are concerned , their prayer for anticipatory bail is allowed having similar role with co-accused .

¶12

Let the applicant no.3 (Islam) & applicant no.4 (Tahira), who are involved in the aforesaid crime, be released on anticipatory bail

¶13

till conclusion of trial on furnishing a personal bond with two sureties each in the like amount to the satisfaction of the trial court concerned with the following conditions:-

¶14

i. The applicant nos.3 & 4 shall not leave India during the pendency of trial without prior permission from the concerned trial Court.

¶15

ii. The applicant nos.3 & 4 shall surrender their passport, if any, to the concerned trial Court forthwith. Their passport will remain in custody of the concerned trial Court.

¶16

iii. That the applicant nos.3 & 4 shall not, directly or indirectly, make any inducement, threat or promise to any person acquainted with the facts of the case so as to dissuade them from disclosing such facts to the Court or to any police officer;

¶17

iv. The applicant nos.3 & 4 shall file an undertaking to the effect that they shall not seek any adjournment on the dates fixed for evidence and the witnesses are present in court. In case of default of this condition, it shall be open for the trial court to treat it as abuse of liberty of bail and pass orders in accordance with law to ensure presence of the applicants.

¶18

v. In case, the applicant nos.3 & 4 misuse the liberty of bail, the trial Court concerned may take appropriate action in accordance with law.

¶19

vi. The applicant nos.3 & 4 shall remain present, in person, before the trial court on the dates fixed for (i) opening of the case, (ii) framing of charge and (iii) recording of statement under Section 313 Cr.P.C. If in the opinion of the trial court default of this condition is deliberate or without sufficient cause, then it shall be open for the trial court to treat such default as abuse of liberty of his bail and proceed against them in accordance with law.

¶20

Order Date :- 26.7.2024 SKD

¶21

Digitally signed by :- SURJIT KUMAR DEY High Court of Judicature at Allahabad

Altaf and 3 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Altaf and 3 Others v. State of Up and Another

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

What the court decided

A compact analysis

Issues for consideration

Statutes considered

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

All orders in this case

Similar cases

Dileep Kumar vs State of U.P. and Another

Rakesh Gupta and 4 Others vs State of Up and 3 Others

Sanjay vs State of U.P. and Another

Mirza Saleem Beg and Another vs State of Up and Another

Rahees Khan and Another vs State of U.P. and Another

Ankit vs State of U.P. and Another